I assume that, at a minimum, there are two competing hypotheses that must be distinguished.
1. David Kelly committed suicide.
2. David Kelly was murdered (possibly by someone who wanted to make the death look like suicide).
Let's think, broadly, about the scene where the body was found.
It's in a wooded area, a significant distance up a track.
If Thames Valley Police gave any intelligent thought to whether David Kelly was killed elsewhere, then the possibility that he was killed elsewhere and that a vehicle had been used to take David Kelly's body up the track is an obvious thing to consider.
But what do Thames Valley Police do? They drive a vehicle up the track!!
And what is the obvious potential effect of doing that? That evidence of another vehicle recently on the track will be obliterated or obfuscated!
PC Franklin gave the following evidence on the morning of Tuesday 2nd September 2003 at page 37 :
15 A. The common approach path was established and we then
16 taped off the area around the body, again for the same
17 reasons. We then left the scene and went back down to
18 collect our vehicle -- we had walked about three
19 quarters of a mile up to the scene -- to take our
20 vehicle back up to await senior CID officers and scenes
21 of crime.
22 Q. So you drive your vehicle back up?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And do you see what happens when the senior officers
1 A. We were asked by the senior scenes of crime officer to
2 search the common approach path; PC Sawyer and myself
At this time point the paramedics have established death. PC Franklin has observed blood.
But nobody knows whether David Kelly has been murdered or has committed suicide.
The possibility that David Kelly was murdered was live. Certainly, PC Franklin has no legitimate authority to conclude that it wasn't.
Therefore the possibility that David Kelly's body had been dumped at the scene was also live.
Given the distance up the track, it's a possibility that has to be examined that a vehicle was used to transport David Kelly's body up the track.
To drive a Police vehicle over what might be a part of a crime scene containing crucial evidence is astronishing, in my view.
Did PC Franklin drive the vehicle up the track on his own initiative?
Didn't he consider the possibility that David Kelly had died elsewhere? And his body transported to the scene where the body was found?
If he didn't consider that possibility then I view his action of driving a vehicle up a track that might contain crucial evidence as grossly negligent.
If he did consider the possibility of evidence being present on the track and still drove his vehicle up that track then a much more sinister interpretation is unavoidable, I think.
I can trace no evidence that the track was ever examined by Thames Valley Police for vehicle tracks or other evidence. If that's the case, then one has to ask the reasons for such a glaring omission.
Evidence from Mr Green:
Mr Dingemans again.."Did you spend your whole time looking at the body and then coming back and making reports?
Mr Green: "I also examined a gate further down the path."
Mr Dingemans: "Right. What did you do that for?"
Mr Green:"I was told that there was a gate there and in case there might have been any blood staining on there; it was just precaution really."
Mr Dingemans: "Did you find anything on the gate?"
Mr Green: "No, nothing."
What is this shaggy dog story about?
A shaggy dog story indeed.
What is "the path"?
Where is "the gate"?
The public narrative, as I understand it, is that there was no clear track to where David Kelly's body was found, at least for the last 50-70 yards. (Implication - "no clear track" = no way his body could have been carried in).
And PC Franklin drove his Land Rover up the "track" very early in proceedings. If the "track" is the "path" then the gate must have been open to allow a Land Rover to pass?
So where is the "path"? Where is the "gate"?
Another loose thread.
I think I have located the mysterious gate. It is,would you believe quite some distance away, close to the river. It was Paul Chapman's examination by Mr Dingemans which yielded this nuggetReplyDelete
"Yes, we walked all the way down the pathway, which came out to a gate just by the River Thames."
He then mentions the people on the mysterious boat.
So why on earth would Mr Green tramp half a kilometer (?) down to the river to look for BLOOD on that gate near the moored boat? Any ideas??
The gate is in the lane on the left just before you get to the wood, it is nowhere near where the body was found, it is unlikely DK went through it and I don’t believe it is of any relevance.ReplyDelete
Just another red herring like the questions about the ECG electrodes on DK's chest.